MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6979305332

Early stakeholder engagement for a possible new multipurpose research reactor for Canada

2025· article· en· W6979305332 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)Canadian Nuclear Laboratories
FundersAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsStakeholderNuclear reactorStakeholder engagementResearch reactorNuclear technologyNuclear power
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has a rich history of nuclear technology development. Since the 1940s, nuclear research infrastructure and facilities, such as National Research Universal (NRU) reactor at Canadian Nuclear Laboratories in Chalk River, Ontario, have played a key role for R&D and for building Canadian expertise and competency in nuclear technology. The NRU reactor retired in 2018. Since the needs of stakeholders vary with time, consideration of a new multipurpose research reactor for Canada must contemplate current user input for their requirements. As an early step in such consideration, a systematic approach was employed to engage various national stakeholders from academia, industry, and research organizations, including the government. Several virtual workshops were held, each with a specific theme around utilizations. To provide international context, our workshops also included presentations from leading nuclear laboratories around the world. We provide a summary of Canada's approach and the main findings of this early stakeholder engagement.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0320.006
Scholarly communication0.0120.003
Open science0.0030.014
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.261
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.118 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207